New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1887-10-02
LUTHER,
BIOGRAPHY FOR POPULAR USE.


Mr.. Bayne claims for his work an affinity In
class and kind with such books as Cardinai
Newmans "Apologiao and Mr.. John Morley's
sVoltairen All three personal histories repre-
senting an important phase Of spiritual evolution
Newman exemplifes type Of religion which In
these days is widely extended, and is stout'y
pushing its claims upon our respect Morieys
svoltairep stands for the opposite school, which
not only rejects authority in matters Of religion
but holds that efforts to prove man carable OF
entering into relation with the spirit OF the
universe must DO abandoned as chimerical Lu-
ther. between these two extremes, denotes what
,.a-. clair, 20 be the central stream OF DIVINE
hnman rrr,-;an resting on Inspiration as q true
source Of knowledge the records OF whicn, en-
bodied in Holy Writ have been con,."-i''eo io'
authoritative Interpretation to no man, churcn -
tribunal ON earth, but have been left to be In
tArpreted by the individual reason and con-
science" The authors object, therefore, is 10
EXHIBIT Luther as middle term between Cathoil-
cism and Atheism and he believes that the time
IA opportune for the restatement Of wholesome
Protestant principles which such conception OF
the subject involves The comparison with New
mans "ApoIogiar is forced, but 1t indicates the
intention of Mr.. Bay mes work better than MS
title page. He has written history of Luther's
religious opinions. rather than either personal
biography or history Of the Reformation. TIC
uses the standard authorities, without adding 10
them any fruits Of independent research pu'
candor and discretion often lead him TO lhde-
rendent conclusions He scorns the credulity of
Protestant myth-makers; he puts ASIDE some
1ayorite old anecdotes he declares that Luther
was often unjust to his adversaries; in particular
he accuses the Reformer Of injustice TO inc
Schocmen, whose doctrine Of salvation by grace
and faith. not by dead works, was precisely that
which, as preached by Luther, Is enormously re-
Carded as one Of the first demonstrations oil the
Protestant revolt. He is careful to snow that
although Luther is the father of free thougn'
and rational religion, he became so against ms
win. for he refused to admit that the natural
reason had any business with the investigation
Of religious truth When he disputed with the
Erfurth scholastcs upon the respective provinces
of reason and revelation, it was not Luther but
the monlxish theologians who upheld the rights
and dignity of the human reason as they are
now universally recognized. I'VE must frankly
face the truth on this point. Liberty IN every
form that deserves the name. owes an fnestlmaoie
debt to Luther He will take high rank to all
time among those who set free the MIND OF
Europe. But he was mainly unconscious OF what
he did, There an element OF wrongness
(. Luthers thinking on this subject 1.-THE e'aims
=, reason, which, r,.encht much evil to Protestant
truth and to the Protestant cause The common
leoend that Luther was suddenly enlightened by
reading a chained Bible in the convent library
as well as the parallel story that the Schooimcn
did net value the sacred Scriptures, Is discussed
nv Mr.. Bayne with scant ceremony. Some pious
readers will perhaps fear that he comedies too
much; but nothing is ever lost in controversy
by entire franlSness.
The attempt to exhibit the harmony between
Luthers character and temrerament and the
general spirit of modern Professionalism, constitutes
the principal interest of the work. The reformer
is presented to much the same as he appeared
TO his contemporarics-boh to the point OF rash
ness, vehement beyond bounds, hating sentimental
nonsense, democratic to the hearts core, impos-
ingly masculine, with a deep vein of coarseness
both in thought and manner. restless tighter
vet an ingenu ,us lover of social pleasures,
scholar who relied upon the intuitiOns OF what
people call hard common sense rather than upon
the learning of the books, his own included.
Stslwart confident. heavy-handed, rude, aggres-
sive. direct, his German manIness was tinged
with a great deal OF bOistcrous vitality, often
raising into a rOughness which the present age
would call vulgar. No other type Of man than
this would have served for the rough work which
Martin Luther had to do. and the rough people
among whom it to be done; and while MIR.
Bsyne has not allowed himself to attribute to his
hero the spirituality and refinement which modern
taste prefers TO associate with religious leaders,
he Is by no means lacking In reverence and ad-
u,iration for his character LISaaeess's hearty en-
joyment of the material good things Of life and
bis contempt for the ascetic spirit were of a
pirce with his persuasion that the supernatural
had usurped q tyrannical influence over human
conduct He wished to restore the proper balance
by raising the natural to the dignity from which
sacerdotalism had deposed 1t. Religious senti-
ment had become excessive. and he would moder-
ate its transports by transferring a share Of our
attachments to the enjoyments Of this worh'
gifts which our Creator never meant that we
should despise. To use Mr.. Baynes expression,
he set his face against too muchness' in relig-
fon The result of his teaching has been TO
permanently moderate the intensity Of religious
emotion We may say even that it has secular
fzed the life Of Christian Nations Whether this
Is consequence which Luther would have
desired or which earnest Christians can regard
with unmixed satisfaction is question upon
which Mr.. Bayne expends some ingenious but
not quite convincing discourse.
Such Is the reformer as he is delineated in
these pages The story Of his work Is much
weaker than the personal portrait. Luther's
doctrinal controversies even his most important
assaults upon the Roman Church, are sometimes
but half explained. rs IL the writer cared much
for the fighting and little for the cause of it. A
conspicuous example OF this defect il the account
Of the very starting point Of the Reformation;
the affair of indulgences. Mr.. Bayno neither
defines the orthodox Roman doctrine Of indul-
penccs Dit seems to us doubtful whether he
knows it) nor states what doctrine Tetzeu
preached, nor by consequence shows Just what
1t was that Luther attacked. He writes OF the
whole business in trivial and quasi-joc
style, with repeated references to the ecclesl-
astical Barnumn and his show, and leaves 1t In
o deplorable state of confusion, which OF course